Queen Bee studied Sociology through to the last quarter at uni and then bailed. I have never known why but she still got the education, she just didn't get the paper. She was never precisely forthcoming about what wheels turned in her head and I suspect to a large extent she was learning by observation for at least as long as I. There's no asking until the wtf, wtf, wtf sensation stabilizes a little bit.
The article is not to entice her into conversation because she's not typically inclined to it except to a specific FB purpose of spreading cheer, often amusement, through a cadre of similarly-motivated people, most of whom seem to be Cliftonites, as dead loyal to territory as a Scottish clan.
(Insert editorial on tribes and how much we need them)
The correlation of social dysfunction to the growing financial have / have not disparity has been demonstrated adequately and credibly to my satisfaction and perhaps that draws a sly interest from Queen Bee which is perfectly cool as the only purpose is to trigger questions. If this is true then ?
The premise is true, at least to our satisfaction, the more financial disparity the greater the social dysfunction and that's readily observable just about all over the world in which there is growing dysfunction as the classes draw more distant.
Even at the mention of the situation, immediate reaction is you can't touch the money, keep your hands off my stack. That is not the intention but rather to encourage them them only to spend it more wisely. No-one except a select few wants more aircraft carriers but Elon Musk is building the most ridiculously cool thing in the Hyperloop we have seen in years. It really is a potential solution for something which has plagued America since not long after the Interstate highways were built, they got too crowded for them to be cool going much of anywhere anymore.
There is no sci-fi now that they have built and tested a working prototype. It's not only pure science anymore when we can watch it. The extrapolation to what it may do is an easy one but we don't want too much fantasizing along that line. Instead we want to look at what it fixes.
There's an immediate big bang to personal traffic on the Interstate since they will likely make lots of these Hyperloop tube buggies and fire them off as quickly as they can load them up. They're one hell's firing rave of a speed and comfort difference better so instant attraction.
One of the biggest expenses and sources of multiple types of pollution (e.g. air, rubber, oil, noise) in American life is nearly eliminated.
There's an enormous expense to the infrastructure but the 'track' for this thing seems minimal and consequently should cost vastly less to build than maintaining existing highway infrastructure. For many Americans, that's an almost instantaneous raise in salary of twenty to forty thousand dollars over four to six, maybe more now, to pay off the vehicles.
The need remains for the city but that appears to be going toward auto-driving cars. Those are usually electric but they are still pollution sources in terms of ozone, rubber, noise, etc. They're also incredibly expensive to the overall consumers because individual solutions are almost invariably the most costly, individually and overall.
How much and how quickly that could be mitigated by Hyperloop tube buggy tracks within the city is unclear. Replacing existing subways is impossible because they can't be abandoned until the replacement exists so then the question is where to put it. One possibility is to use the median in Interstates and gradually expand to more Hyperloop tubes as the Interstate fades away.
The need for long-haul trucks is not forgotten and our only consideration in that regard is please don't call them mega buggies, super buggies, or so. Elon Musk is highly-imaginative and I don't think he would put up with it anyway.
(Ed: hyper buggies?)
Kill me now. Please.
The sci-fi aspect is the switching mechanism because there will be various central nexuses into which piles of tube buggies will be entering from every possible direction. Some may touch and go to change passenger roster a tad and then continue to some other destination. Keeping all those tubes available to all the other tube buggies will require some novel engineering.
The sociological aspect is what comes from a likely and significant change to the financial circumstance of an enormous number of people. The Trumps don't care because the relative expense of automobiles isn't anywhere near that of the poors.
The sociological benefit overall is the poors will spend that money on something else and it seems it would behoove the wise investor to try to determine what that would be. In this place it would mean most likely first fixing the house, getting better chow, replacing an old computer, all things which keep the money moving and keep the society healthy. When things grow at the bottom, they grow everywhere else as well.
These are not issues for the Trumps because after you get rich you hardly ever get poor. That's when they point to T. Bone Pickens but he wasn't so much a businessman as a combination of a Las Vegas gambler and P.T. Barnum. In most cases, Trumps hardly ever lose their jingle jack and they stay rich.
(Ed: didn't work out so well in France)
Well, sometimes they don't get it and we need to chop off their heads because they never will.
The sociology of the lot is in the obvious social dysfunction now and the Establishment response of more and bigger cop guns which only further exacerbates the problem while addressing in no way whatsoever the cause of it.
(Insert huge plug for Bernie Sanders who addresses problems rather than symptoms which were largely caused by the people who talk about them)
We don't want your money, we want you to spend it and not just on each other because that does nothing for the greater society; ultimately it does nothing substantively good for anyone because you can't fookin' keep it anyway. Eventually the paws go into the air and then it goes to "Woman in the Snow:"
Where's your freedom now,
little girl
Note: after a hooker dies from crack addiction
The article is not to entice her into conversation because she's not typically inclined to it except to a specific FB purpose of spreading cheer, often amusement, through a cadre of similarly-motivated people, most of whom seem to be Cliftonites, as dead loyal to territory as a Scottish clan.
(Insert editorial on tribes and how much we need them)
The correlation of social dysfunction to the growing financial have / have not disparity has been demonstrated adequately and credibly to my satisfaction and perhaps that draws a sly interest from Queen Bee which is perfectly cool as the only purpose is to trigger questions. If this is true then ?
The premise is true, at least to our satisfaction, the more financial disparity the greater the social dysfunction and that's readily observable just about all over the world in which there is growing dysfunction as the classes draw more distant.
Even at the mention of the situation, immediate reaction is you can't touch the money, keep your hands off my stack. That is not the intention but rather to encourage them them only to spend it more wisely. No-one except a select few wants more aircraft carriers but Elon Musk is building the most ridiculously cool thing in the Hyperloop we have seen in years. It really is a potential solution for something which has plagued America since not long after the Interstate highways were built, they got too crowded for them to be cool going much of anywhere anymore.
There is no sci-fi now that they have built and tested a working prototype. It's not only pure science anymore when we can watch it. The extrapolation to what it may do is an easy one but we don't want too much fantasizing along that line. Instead we want to look at what it fixes.
There's an immediate big bang to personal traffic on the Interstate since they will likely make lots of these Hyperloop tube buggies and fire them off as quickly as they can load them up. They're one hell's firing rave of a speed and comfort difference better so instant attraction.
One of the biggest expenses and sources of multiple types of pollution (e.g. air, rubber, oil, noise) in American life is nearly eliminated.
There's an enormous expense to the infrastructure but the 'track' for this thing seems minimal and consequently should cost vastly less to build than maintaining existing highway infrastructure. For many Americans, that's an almost instantaneous raise in salary of twenty to forty thousand dollars over four to six, maybe more now, to pay off the vehicles.
The need remains for the city but that appears to be going toward auto-driving cars. Those are usually electric but they are still pollution sources in terms of ozone, rubber, noise, etc. They're also incredibly expensive to the overall consumers because individual solutions are almost invariably the most costly, individually and overall.
How much and how quickly that could be mitigated by Hyperloop tube buggy tracks within the city is unclear. Replacing existing subways is impossible because they can't be abandoned until the replacement exists so then the question is where to put it. One possibility is to use the median in Interstates and gradually expand to more Hyperloop tubes as the Interstate fades away.
The need for long-haul trucks is not forgotten and our only consideration in that regard is please don't call them mega buggies, super buggies, or so. Elon Musk is highly-imaginative and I don't think he would put up with it anyway.
(Ed: hyper buggies?)
Kill me now. Please.
The sci-fi aspect is the switching mechanism because there will be various central nexuses into which piles of tube buggies will be entering from every possible direction. Some may touch and go to change passenger roster a tad and then continue to some other destination. Keeping all those tubes available to all the other tube buggies will require some novel engineering.
The sociological aspect is what comes from a likely and significant change to the financial circumstance of an enormous number of people. The Trumps don't care because the relative expense of automobiles isn't anywhere near that of the poors.
The sociological benefit overall is the poors will spend that money on something else and it seems it would behoove the wise investor to try to determine what that would be. In this place it would mean most likely first fixing the house, getting better chow, replacing an old computer, all things which keep the money moving and keep the society healthy. When things grow at the bottom, they grow everywhere else as well.
These are not issues for the Trumps because after you get rich you hardly ever get poor. That's when they point to T. Bone Pickens but he wasn't so much a businessman as a combination of a Las Vegas gambler and P.T. Barnum. In most cases, Trumps hardly ever lose their jingle jack and they stay rich.
(Ed: didn't work out so well in France)
Well, sometimes they don't get it and we need to chop off their heads because they never will.
The sociology of the lot is in the obvious social dysfunction now and the Establishment response of more and bigger cop guns which only further exacerbates the problem while addressing in no way whatsoever the cause of it.
(Insert huge plug for Bernie Sanders who addresses problems rather than symptoms which were largely caused by the people who talk about them)
We don't want your money, we want you to spend it and not just on each other because that does nothing for the greater society; ultimately it does nothing substantively good for anyone because you can't fookin' keep it anyway. Eventually the paws go into the air and then it goes to "Woman in the Snow:"
Where's your freedom now,
little girl
Note: after a hooker dies from crack addiction
No comments:
Post a Comment